@jacob: My bad. I thought you were implying that humans dislike pain to the extent that they irrationally avoid high stakes calculated risks. I would also note that if "preservation of capital" is that which the game seeks to maximize, I believe (may be misreading) that what you are suggesting as optimal strategy only applies to single generation as opposed to multi-generational game. The multi-generational game would also require at least two additional levels of play (Sex and Maternity/Paternity) requiring different strategies than the Survival as Individual level. I would further suggest that the blend of Cultural Capital and Financial Capital found where the boundary of Upper-Middle/Aspirational Class overlaps with Highly Affluent Class may represent best known strategy towards winning Multi-Generational version of Preservation of Capital Game.

@Campitor:

The sub-text of your solution set is that during your impoverished childhood, you directly or indirectly suffered ill treatment at the hands of violent youth allowed to freely exert their will in a "Lord of the Flies" type environment. Therefore, your own Adult Masculine (Paternal/Power realm) wishes to strike out strongly to protect your own internal vulnerable child (Juvenile Feminine), because you immediately semi-consciously identify with the victim. I grew up in a very safe, affluent setting, but with a mother who suffered from bi-polar disease resulting in outbursts of rage and manic shopping sprees and related behavior causing great financial stress for my very fiscally conservative, firmly Upper-Middle class father. So, I have some experience with therapeutic solutions to childhood trauma. In terms of the crude Jungian model I prefer, you will likely benefit from letting go of some Paternal Control mechanisms which cause you to place your boundaries somewhat forward of the ideal towards imposing judgment/rules on other humans, and thereby limiting your own freedom.

The sub-text of your solution set is that during your impoverished childhood, you directly or indirectly suffered ill treatment at the hands of violent youth allowed to freely exert their will in a "Lord of the Flies" type environment. Therefore, your own Adult Masculine (Paternal/Power realm) wishes to strike out strongly to protect your own internal vulnerable child (Juvenile Feminine), because you immediately semi-consciously identify with the victim. I grew up in a very safe, affluent setting, but with a mother who suffered from bi-polar disease resulting in outbursts of rage and manic shopping sprees and related behavior causing great financial stress for my very fiscally conservative, firmly Upper-Middle class father. So, I have some experience with therapeutic solutions to childhood trauma. In terms of the crude Jungian model I prefer, you will likely benefit from letting go of some Paternal Control mechanisms which cause you to place your boundaries somewhat forward of the ideal towards imposing judgment/rules on other humans, and thereby limiting your own freedom.

You keep resorting to ad-hominem attacks, albeit in a very polite manner, instead of refuting my points. Okay - I'll play along for just a bit

The sub-text of your solution set is that during your impoverished childhood, you directly or indirectly suffered ill treatment at the hands of violent youth allowed to freely exert their will in a "Lord of the Flies" type environment.

Let's say your 100% right about me getting freely assualted in a Lord of the Flies atmosphere and that experience has affected my view. How does that negate the recommendation that violent students with sociopathic tendencies should be segregated from other students and recieve their education in a clinical setting where they can get help? Do you think violent students should be free to comingle with non-violent students? Do you think students with sociapathic tendecies shouldn't get help? I know, I know, I'm strawman'ing you but it's a bit deserved when you keep ad-hominem'ing me.

Therefore, your own Adult Masculine (Paternal/Power realm) wishes to strike out strongly to protect your own internal vulnerable child (Juvenile Feminine), because you immediately semi-consciously identify with the victim.

I don't identify with the victims because I don't view myself as a victim. I do have sympathy for individuals who are victims of psychological and physical abuse irrespective if they are also perpetrators of violence; you don't break the chain of violence by letting violent people wage violence on normal people.

I grew up in a very safe, affluent setting, but with a mother who suffered from bi-polar disease resulting in outbursts of rage and manic shopping sprees and related behavior causing great financial stress for my very fiscally conservative, firmly Upper-Middle class father. So, I have some experience with therapeutic solutions to childhood trauma.

I used to care for patients with psychological and mental disorders: attempted suicide, dissociative identity disorder, dementia, traumatic brain injury. My job was to make sure they didn't hurt themselves if suicidal, monitor them for any sign of brain hemmoraging, and help feed and dress them if they were incapicitated in some way. Most of my time was spent listening to them - they just wanted someone to talk to. So I guess we both have experience dealing with trauma - I award both of us the official raspberry award for tooting our own horns.

In terms of the crude Jungian model I prefer, you will likely benefit from letting go of some Paternal Control mechanisms which cause you to place your boundaries somewhat forward of the ideal towards imposing judgment/rules on other humans, and thereby limiting your own freedom.

"Forward of the ideal" is your opinion. I doubt wanting freedom from violence by segrating the violent from the non-violent is a Paternal Control Mechanism - it's just plain common sense and biology. All organisms, even the most basic, try to evade harm.

I think they are both poor solutions. One reason being that although violent behavior is anti-social unless sanctioned and promoted by the government (because granted monopoly on use of force),it is not a psychologically aberrant feature in our species, especially when exhibited by young males. So, the inappropriate squelching of a natural instinct may result in other societal problems- reference “A Clockwork Orange.”

I absolutely agree that disruptive students should be removed from the classroom, but I think it would be a more effective and less expensive to provide inner city schools with decent playgrounds and a coach/ supervisor who would make the boys, and occasional girl, run laps until exhausted before they are returned to classroom.

Furthermore, as somebody who has spent some time on the frontline herself, my response to the audio-tape you linked was something like “If you can’t take the heat, then get out of the kitchen. “ The adult version of the aspirational class girl who loved second grade and was a very good helper is not entirely well-suited to teaching junior high boys in the inner city.

Furthermore, as somebody who has spent some time on the frontline herself, my response to the audio-tape you linked was something like “If you can’t take the heat, then get out of the kitchen. “ The adult version of the aspirational class girl who loved second grade and was a very good helper is not entirely well-suited to teaching junior high boys in the inner city.

If the link you're talking about is this one: https://youtu.be/-SRCY8FqoyQ, the teacher is talking about violent incidents to students and threats of violence made against the staff. I wouldn't consider girls getting sexually assaulted, boys getting their legs put in vises so their shoes can be stolen, or kids pounding on doors to be let in so they can hurt someone a "can't stand the heat" type of situation. And you can't get kids to run until their are exhausted when they don't want to. Did you listen to that link in it's entirety? And that was only 1 link - there's a deluge of them all over the place of educators complaining about the violence in their schools. Violence and disruptions are a major problems and removing these students, who have no incentives to behave or lack the ability to behave as a result of trauma, is vital to the success of the other students. Running laps isn't going to stop someone from acting out who has emotional issues. If exercise was the cure to violence then all football and track and field teams would be paragons of passivity which they are not.

My point exactly. Is it the ultimate goal of our society to therapeut or medicate our young men into state of passivity? Is it possible that the long run consequeces of this cruel and unnatural protocol might prove even more harmful to the outcome of our culture, or even our species?

I believe the majority of humans behave more or less in alignment with the unspoken social contract of "I won't punch you if you don't hit me"; they know how to resolve their conflicts in a non-physical manner using words instead of fists. So the appropriate audience for therapy will be those who repeatedly show a lack of self control and harm themselves and others. Some will respond to the therapy and some will not. Those who don't should remain in therapy or in an alternative school so they don't harm other students or their teachers. Average class time is 40 to 60 minutes. Any significant interruption costs time which reduces time spent learning: Interruption+Time to Refocus = Time Lost. This loss has a significant impact to knowledge acquisition.

At this point I think we will just have to agree to disagree. But I stand by my theory that the 9% tutoring their kids is very low on the totem pole of what is affecting children in poor school districts. Violence and disruption is the elephant in the room that no one discusses for political and emotional reasons.

Can you name the uncomfortable feelings that you were experiencing when you decided that you no longer wished to continue this discussion with me?

I never felt uncomfortable. It seemed that our discussion was at an impasse and any further discussion would just be a rinse and repeat of what was said before. Unless you have some undisclosed facts to convey, nothing that has been stated previously has made me consider changing my opinion regarding the Pareto effect that school violence has on poor school districts. I go to where the facts and my own personal investigation leads me.

Cognition is affected by trauma and interruption. Persistent low level stress also impacts memory retention and focus. Violence and major classroom disturbances reduces time spent teaching, creates stress, trauma, and interruptions. Students of higher IQ can work through this because they grasp the material faster and move on to Advanced Placement classes where all students are motivated. The average student and not so motivated students don't have the opportunities to free themselves of their violent classmates which are probably a small minority but whose behavior has enormous negative impact; grades and learning suffer.

Good parry of my attempt to impose unsought therapeutic environment upon you . I was attempting some analogue of conversation such as:

Therapist: What uncomfortable feelings were you experiencing when you kicked the other student in the head and took his lunch.

Client: I was feeling hungry for some hot chips, so I saw that he had some hot chips, so I took his hot chips.

A classroom is a social system. Human social systems function largely in relative, rather than absolute, terms. So, for example, even in an A.P. 12th grade mathematics classroom in a very affluent, well regarded University town district, there will be one kid who is the class clown and disrupts the process for a couple minutes.

It is also true that humans fairly quickly adjust to new circumstances. So, for instance, because I have become so acclimated to dealing with urban youth, I recently boarded a crowded city bus, and while acting on auto-pilot, instead of pointedly avoiding a VERY ominous looking youth of about 19, I directly asked him to move his feet, so that I could share his seat, and he did as I requested. Then a second later, I realized what I had just done. (I would like to note that in general the bus riders of Detroit are more polite about offering me seating precedence as an older female than the bus riders in more affluent communities.)

One of the 7th grade girls I tutor was suspended from school this week for kicking another student in the head. This was no more remarkable to me than the sound of shelling on an episode of M.A.S.H. There was a particularly terrible class of 6th graders at one of the schools last year. Instead of the usual 3 boys (or 2 boys and 1 girl) who are out of control in any given group of 28, there were 8 of them. Their classroom teacher, who looked like somebody you would more likely encounter on a guided bird-watching tour, was on her last year before retirement. So, she would say things to me like "Thanks for dealing with my assholes yesterday." on the occasions I allowed myself into being duped into covering for her. That's why it struck me kind of odd or fake that the teacher sounded like she was crying on that audio-link you uploaded.

If somebody started pounding on the doors of the library shouting something like "Hey Martell, get over here, because I am going to break your fucking legs.", first I would judge whether the tone was just indicative of Branando, in which case I would go to the door myself and tell the kid to beat it. If the threat seemed legit in the moment threatening, I would call the office, and they would likely send the security guard to deal with the problem. If the security guard couldn't deal, or it was otherwise warranted, the police would be summoned. If for some reason I was in a situation in which the administration was not inclined to summon or enact appropriate security measures, then I would call the police myself. If, for some reason, such as being tranported in time machine back to the Wild West, I was attempting to teach in an entirely unregulated environment, I suppose I would have to arm myself. In no circumstance would I think having a nervous breakdown and crying in a public forum would be a helpful measure.

I am still probably not explaining very well, but it is my judgment that this is a complex systems problem, not a problem that can be appropriately addressed with "just the facts" or any linear new rule of order. So, instead of a graph, I would refer you to Zola's masterful novel "Germinal" which explores the social effects on members of both the lower and upper class when the economic system of a mining town in 19th century France fails.

I do have sympathy for individuals who are victims of psychological and physical abuse irrespective if they are also perpetrators of violence; you don't break the chain of violence by letting violent people wage violence on normal people.

Violent people ARE normal people. Nonviolence is not a human norm. Our society has prioritized nonviolence, but every individual had to learn to conform. What 7w5 seems, in her own way, to be talking about is how to train normal children to be nonviolent children, with professional detachment about the failures.

Now return to your corners. And.... FIGHT!

Last edited by Riggerjack on Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

When one of my very remedial 7th grade girls was becoming whiny and resistant to further instruction, I said "Let's take a break.", and I offered her one of the carrot cake cookies I had packed for my lunch, and we chatted a bit about girl stuff, and she thanked me.

Two of my 4th grade students were full of energy one recent sunny afternoon, so they ran across the room and somersaulted right over the top of a high counter. The 7th grade boys were up on the balls of their feet, fists raised, bouncing and grinning at each other in the noisy, stinky hallway. If I had full reign of authority and decent facilities at my disposal, I would have taken them out to a playground or on a hike instead of trying to settle them down to study again. Human beings should not be treated like hamsters or machines being loaded with software.

I was luring a very bright, but very bad, 5 year old over to my side by reading a picture book aloud. He was resistant to giving in to his obvious interest. So, he held himself back and called me a "bitch." So, the para-professional put him in the isolation corner. Thus teaching the child that the purpose of education is to limit his expression, rather than to allow him access to some literature he had the innate facilities to appreciate. Fail.

The other day I walked into the school office and without preamble said "I need somebody to unlock the computer room.", and the assistant principal replied "Good morning!", and I chuckled, adjusted myself, and smiled and said "Good Morning, and how are you?" to her.

Every morning, every one of us, has to wake up and then proceed to do our very best to once again form a civil society.

Sorry if I'm derailing the current thrust of the thread but I thought people interested in the OP might be interested in this PBS interview with Richard Reeves who wrote a book last year (Dream Hoarders) detailing the problem. The author's approach is too liberal-leaning for me, but he does articulate the issue well.

Hard for me to comment on Reeves and his take. I've never met anyone who attended an Ivy League school or lived in an exclusive NYC neighborhood so I can't say if they are hoarding all the dreams. Nobody is really after my dreams.

Also, I think you would have to consider any university listed in some U.S. Top 50 list when considering "membership" in top 19%.

Truth be told, I have no business coming off as Pollyanna as my last post, because there is no way in hell I would enroll my own grandchild in the inner city school where I tutor. I sent my own kids to rural schools with overall average test scores, but I was well aware that they would end up in classes with the other advanced kids of long-distance commuters to affluent/aspirational zone, and we could afford to buy a lovely old house with leaded glass French doors, and room for a big garden in a neighborhood where nobody bothered to lock their doors on my underemployed wannabe musician ex-husband's income. So, my kids received all or most of the advantages of an aspirational class childhood, including full-time maternal care until school-age, at budget rate. They also had affluent grandparents who provided all the ballet lessons, vacation trips, toys, and expensive prom dresses they might want. If my daughter and her fiance have a child, his affluent future is already fairly well-assured due to likely large inheritance of father and mother's private college connection boosted career.

Regarding Richard Reeves, it all comes down to whether one believes the stratification is a zero-sum game, as he clearly does.

I don't care about the 1% or the 20% as long as the rest of the population has the means and opportunity for a comfortable life. I think the vast majority does in fact have that opportunity, although starting places will never be equal. Nor will outcomes so I'm not sure what all of the hand-wringing is all about. Groups protecting their wealth and status is nothing new and we all self-segregate if given the opportunity.

It's a zero-sum game on the level of raw resources, and it's a zero-sum game on the level of anything that is allocated on the basis of results of grading on the curve. Otherwise, it clearly isn't a zero-sum game.

Maybe the true sub-text of this discussion has to do with the fact that my 4th grade students who can't read appear to be happier on a daily basis than the average member of the aspirational class, because hoisted on the petard of their own making. I mean, think about the ramifications of the wonderful privilege of being able to afford the mortgage in a highly regarded school district. Ka-ching goes the cash register of the under-educated contractor providing the storm drains for the build of the newest outlying development within the zip-code to be located on a former swamp.

It's a zero-sum game on the level of raw resources, and it's a zero-sum game on the level of anything that is allocated on the basis of results of grading on the curve. Otherwise, it clearly isn't a zero-sum game.

...

That is not necessarily true. Technology continually adds to available resources and will continue to do so in perpetuity. (Mine them Asteroids)